Core of Corruption...

[wildbilln864]

A documentary film series which details a comprehensive investigation into clandestine intelligence operations and conspiracies. The project is surfacing exclusive whistleblowers, insiders and critical evidence for the very first time.
Part 1

[wildbilln864]

1. kicking a good video....

even if it is 15 parts.

[wildbilln864]

2. kick. nt

[wildbilln864]

3. here's a link to...

the entire video. :hi:

[rollingrock]

4. Yeah, I saw this a while ago

I need to see it again to digest it all. Incredible amount of bombshell information, all completely ignored by the 9/11 Ommission.

[rollingrock]

5. Incredible revelations in Senator Bob Graham's book

* the FBI and CIA actively aided the 19 hijackers and provided them with visas, cash, housing, training and logistics support into the country in the months before 9/11 even though they were known to be Saudi terrorists. None of these guys were screened or interviewed before entering into the US as is normally done before a visa can be apprroved even though they were on the terrorist watch lists! No way they could have acquired these Visas and gotten into the country without the active assistance from one or more of these agencies.

* George Bush Sr. was having breakfast and making business deals with Osama bin Laden's brother in the Ritz Hotel in Washington on the morning of Sept. 11 attacks. according to CNN and Fox, the bin ladens were flown out of the country shortly after 9/11 without being questioned by investigators.

* Brian Williams reported on ABC Nightly News that in April 2000 a man named Naez Khan (spelling?), who was a future 9/11 hijacker turned himself into the FBI and confessed to them the details of a plot to hijack commercial planes and fly them into the World Trade Center, of which he was a part. He also disclosed at least 30 more hijacker trainees were inside the United States as well, even their locations. What did the FBI do?? They ordered him released and never bother to look into it!!

* Republican representative Curt Weldon revealed to Congress on the House floor that Able Danger, a US intelligence operation that tracked terrorist suspects, had positively identified the head of the hijacking plot Mohammed Atta in the US on at least 13 separate occasions prior to 9/11 but that they were ordered to stand down and someone ordered the information gathered on him to be destroyed. Atta was never arrested or even picked up for questioning.






damn...and that's just the tip of the iceburg!!

[SDuderstadt]

6. Is that actually what Graham's book said or...

is that what "Core of Corruption" claims Graham's book said? Why do I think it's the latter???

[rollingrock]

7. All of these things

were also reported in the mainstream media, as I have listed.
if you have a problem with the information, take it up with them.

[SDuderstadt]

8. You didn't "list" anything....

I'm asking you for specific cites, which I doubt you can provide, dude.

Simple question: did you actually read Graham's book or not?

[rollingrock]

9. Did you bother to read my post?

no, you did not.

[SDuderstadt]

10. Yes, I did, dude...

why can't you provide specific citations for your claims? Or, is this just the typical ''truther' ''believe it because I said it'' bullshit?

[rollingrock]

11. No you didn't

you didn't even watch the video. fail.

[SDuderstadt]

12. Dude...you asked me if I read your post...

I did. In turn, I asked you to cite your source(s) for your claims about Graham's book. You just mumble something about it being in the MSM. And, no, "Core of Corruption" does not qualify as MSM.

Can you back up your claims or not?

[rollingrock]

14. You don't read very well, do you?

The only thing from Graham's book is the item listed from the first bullet point.

The rest are from various MSM sources, which are listed. Open your eyes and ears.

[SDuderstadt]

15. Dude....look at your fucking...

subject line....duh.

And I'm calling bullshit on your first claim. Please point specifically to where Graham's book says that.

[rollingrock]

18. Article written by Bob Graham

This stuff is also in his book.

www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/02/05/the_truth_behind_the_san_diego_two/

The truth behind the San Diego two

By Bob Graham | February 5, 2006

IN TUESDAY evening's State of the Union speech, President Bush defended his warrantless wiretap program by giving one example of where it might have saved American lives: ''It is said that prior to the attacks of Sept. 11, our government failed to connect the dots of the conspiracy. We now know that two of the hijackers in the United States placed telephone calls to Al Qaeda operatives overseas. But we did not know about their plans until it was too late."

Vice President Dick Cheney made a similar assertion three weeks ago. Both refer to two of the 19 hijackers who lived in San Diego in 2000: Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Midhar. In these two sentences the president has committed two sins. He has stretched the truth, and he has distracted the American people from the steps we need to take to truly make us more secure from terrorist attacks.

During the Joint Inquiry of the Congressional Intelligence Committees, which I cochaired, we determined the following to be some of the major failures involving the San Diego two: In December 1999, the CIA was alerted that a summit of terrorists would be held at Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, and that two Saudis, Hazmi and Midhar, would participate.

The Kuala Lumpur CIA station decided to outsource the surveillance of the summit to Malaysian intelligence, which was unable to place a listening device in the meeting room. Had it done so, we probably would have heard of Al Qaeda's plans to attack a US destroyer, which in October 2000 culminated in the bombing of the USS Cole, and the initial preparations for 9/11.

.....continued


Bob Graham, a former Florida senator, is a senior fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government.
--------------------------------------


So the two terrorist suspects, Hazmi and Midhar, were staying in San Diego in the home of an FBI informant named Abdussattar Shaikh. During that time and fully known to the FBI, Hazmi and Midhar left the country to attend a terrorist summit in Malaysia. Even after all that, the FBI or the CIA never picked them up in Malaysia and even let them re-enter the US?? Just let them do whatever they want right under their noses?? They were living under the roof of an FBI informant and the FBI never lifted a finger against them, no arrest or anything and just keep let them wander freely about the country, do anything and go wherever they want even after they had attended a terrorist summit and were obvious terrorists??

[SDuderstadt]

19. So, this is what Graham wrote....

The truth behind the San Diego two

By Bob Graham | February 5, 2006

IN TUESDAY evening's State of the Union speech, President Bush defended his warrantless wiretap program by giving one example of where it might have saved American lives: ''It is said that prior to the attacks of Sept. 11, our government failed to connect the dots of the conspiracy. We now know that two of the hijackers in the United States placed telephone calls to Al Qaeda operatives overseas. But we did not know about their plans until it was too late."

Vice President Dick Cheney made a similar assertion three weeks ago. Both refer to two of the 19 hijackers who lived in San Diego in 2000: Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Midhar. In these two sentences the president has committed two sins. He has stretched the truth, and he has distracted the American people from the steps we need to take to truly make us more secure from terrorist attacks.

During the Joint Inquiry of the Congressional Intelligence Committees, which I cochaired, we determined the following to be some of the major failures involving the San Diego two: In December 1999, the CIA was alerted that a summit of terrorists would be held at Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, and that two Saudis, Hazmi and Midhar, would participate.

The Kuala Lumpur CIA station decided to outsource the surveillance of the summit to Malaysian intelligence, which was unable to place a listening device in the meeting room. Had it done so, we probably would have heard of Al Qaeda's plans to attack a US destroyer, which in October 2000 culminated in the bombing of the USS Cole, and the initial preparations for 9/11.

.....continued


Bob Graham, a former Florida senator, is a senior fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government.

But this is how you summarized it:

* the FBI and CIA actively aided the 19 hijackers and provided them with visas, cash, housing, training and logistics support into the country in the months before 9/11 even though they were known to be Saudi terrorists. None of these guys were screened or interviewed before entering into the US as is normally done before a visa can be apprroved even though they were on the terrorist watch lists! No way they could have acquired these Visas and gotten into the country without the active assistance from one or more of these agencies.

If we call Graham's article point A and your claim point B, could you please explain to us how you got from point A to point B? If you were offering Graham's article in support of your claim, you just disproved your own claim, dude. Did you notice that?

Again, simple question: Did you actually read Graham's book? It's a simple yes or no question, dude.

[rollingrock]

20. Did I ever say I did?

I read several of Graham's articles and seen interviews in which he talks about his book.

Now, why don't you address the questions that are raised from the article?

Why did the FBI never lift a finger to stop, arrest these terrorists, even as the lived under the roof of an FBI informant? Why were they allowed to travel freely about the country and do whatever they want? Why were there visas never confiscated?? Why are they allowed to travel back into the US, using their Visas, after attending a terrorist summit in Malaysia??

[SDuderstadt]

21. No, dude...

you're not skating on this one. Your subject line clearly gives the readers the impression that:

all of your claims came from Graham's book
that you actually read his book.
And that you, thus, have firsthand knowledge from his book

So, the question remains: who are you parroting in those claims, dude?

[rollingrock]

22. That's not what it says.

The items that are not taken from Graham's book have their individual sources clearly LABELLED.

Comprende? Would you like me put in some Spanish subtitles for you?

[SDuderstadt]

24. Dude....

And, how would the reader know whether you were citing those from Graham's book or not, given your subject line? Also, just giving a generic reference like CNN or Brian Williams isn't very convincing. You need to link to specific links. The bigger question is whether you meant to mislead readers or whether this is just a consequence of your overall incoherent writing style.

[rollingrock]

25. Click on the freaking video!

Brian Williams is shown in the OP's video talking about the Naez Khan guy.

Curt Weldon is seen making speech about the (intentional) failures of Able Danger.

CNN and Fox are talking about the bin Ladens being whisked away out of the US a few days after 9/11 on a flight chartered by either the Saudi government or OSAMA BIN LADEN himself.

etc. etc.

Jesus Christ. The freaking link is right there in front of your face!

[SDuderstadt]

26. Don't change the subject, dude...

the issue is your claims about Graham's book, which you know admit you've never read. Quit acting like you're the victim here.

BTW, Curt Weldon is a certifible nut and Able Danger has been totally discredited to all but the most desperate "truthers"


The bin Laden family didn't leave the US until 9/20, so that hardly qualifies as "whisked out of the US" after a few days. And I'd love to see any evidence you have that bin Laden chartered the flight. I'll wait.

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Bin_Laden_family_flight

As far as the Brian Williams claims, you can believe CT sites like "Core of Corruption" if you want. Reasonable people don't.

What this mostly demostrates is your aversion to fact-checking before you make goofy claims.

[rollingrock]

42. Wolf Blitzer of CNN

said the flight was chartered within days either by the Royal Family or OBL himself.

I think CNN would be a bit more credible than some random 911 propaganda website that provides no basis for its claims. Too bad for you.

[KDLarsen]

13. Of course it is

Most of the claims there are utter rubbish:
1) The backgrounds of the terroists are already wellknown, we know how they got their visas (Student visas), we know where they got their training (in Afghanistan), we know where they got their cash (Wire & Bank transfers from the UAE)

2) Bush Sr. was attending a Carlyle Group meeting in Washington D.C. Amongst the people at that investment meeting was Shafig bin Laden, Osama's half-brother.

3) That's mighty impressive, since only 2 of the hijackers were even in the US at that point.

4) Curt Weldon and his Able Danger fantasies have already been dealt with in a previous thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=270333&mesg_id=270443

[rollingrock]

16. Student visas!?

wow. so according to you, any foreigner or terrorist that wanted to gain legal entry to the US can bypass the security screening process by simply declaring themselves to be a student, with no background or security checks whatsoever?? that's a pretty incredible assertion. you got anything to back it up? a link perhaps?

[SDuderstadt]

17. Fucking unbelievable....

so according to you, any foreigner or terrorist that wanted to gain legal entry to the US can bypass the security screening process by simply declaring themselves to be a student, with no background or security checks whatsoever??

can you show us anywhere where KDL said anything like what you claim?

[KDLarsen]

23. I'm not making any claim to that

But the fact is that none of the hijackers had any previous criminal history, though some of them had definantly overstayed their visas on a number of occasions, so they couldn't be denied through there. They lied as hell on their applications (Hani Hanjour claimed never to have been in the US before), threw away their passports and reported them stolen (in order to erase travel visas to Afghanistan), and presented an alround innocent case as being students who wanted to learn to fly in the US.

And if the FBI/CIA were so helpful to the hijackers, how come Mohamed al-Kahtani and Ramzi Binalshibh failed to gain visas? Binalshibh even applied four times!

[rollingrock]

27. They got into the country fraudulently

with active assistance from the CIA who were overriding VISA decisions made (by the US consulate) in Saudi Arabia. The CIA was actively assisting known al Qaeda operatives getting into the United States to be trained for varous covert operations. That's according to Michael Springman who blew the whistle. Springman was the Chief of the VISA section at the US foreign consulate in Saudi Arabia at the time, with 20 years experience working in the foreign service and state department.

When Consulate Chief Springman went to complain about what was going on to his superiors at the US State Department, he was basically told to 'do your job and keep your mouth shut.'


Interview with Michael Springman at 5:00
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DpWa3gjj3M&feature=PlayList&p=3247BDD9C03C171C&index=3

Michael Springman speech at the National press Club:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgYFo79q1Ek

[SDuderstadt]

28. Jesus, dude...

who the fuck is Michael Springman?

[rollingrock]

29. The guy in charge of approving the VISAs, dude

got it?

[SDuderstadt]

30. Yeah, dude...

in the 1980's! Are you claiming the planning for 9/11 began back then?

J. Michael Springman, Esq., the former chief of the Visa Section in Juddah, Saudi Arabia and an attorney with twenty years in the U.S. foreign service, told numerous stories of CIA staff in Juddah overriding Springman’s denial of visas in the 1980s for Pakistani, Sudanese and other individuals, whom he felt had not satisfied legal requirements under the Immigration and Nationality Act to travel into the United States. Springman said that he later learned that these individuals were being recruited to fight in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union. He estimated that as many as 100 people got visas through him being overruled this way

.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0206/S00160.htm

Jesus.

[rollingrock]

31. It establishes a history and pattern of Visa fraud by the CIA

they did the same thing after BUSH II took office, but instead of getting an honest guy like Michael Springman to run the US consulate in SA, they got a Michael Brown Bush crony-type person to run it and wouldn't make any waves. Heckuva job!

[SDuderstadt]

32. So, in other words....

Springman had absolutely NOTHING to do with issuing the visas to the hijackers. Thanks for that confession. Why didn't you inform the readers of that earlier? As I have said before, the dishonesty of the "truth movement" would be ironic, if it weren't so stunning.

[rollingrock]

33. That's because Springman was essentially fired

or re-assigned out of the country for blowing the whistle on his superiors who were on the take.

[SDuderstadt]

34. LOLOLOL....

but he still had NOTHING to do with issuing visas to the hijackers, did he....

[rollingrock]

35. And nothing has changed since the 80s, dude

15 of the 19 'hijackers' obtained their Visas at the same office in Jedda Saudi Arabia that Springman used to work in. After Bush II takes office the Visa section is firmly back under control of CIA operatives, just as it was under Bush Sr. when Springman tried to blow the whistle on them back then. And that speech Springman gave at the National Press Club was in 2002, so it is very timely and relevant to 9/11.

[SDuderstadt]

36. Provide some actual documentation, dude....

Also, could you chack your e-mail? One of our friends here needs help.

[rollingrock]

37. Ask yourself a simple question

In the months prior to 9/11, just how was it possible for a bunch of al Qaeda operatives, both known and suspected, to obtain visas to enter the country legally in the first place?? Why were they never properly screened?? Isn't that one of the very first questions the 9/11 Omission, or any competent investigator, should have been asking right after 9/11? How did they get into the country so easily??

The answer is: they got into the country the same way they got in back in the 80s, with the assistance of the CIA.

[SDuderstadt]

38. Are you honestly claiming the 9/11 Commission did not address this issue?

Moreover, do you have ANY evidence at all for your CIA claim?

[rollingrock]

39. You tell me

what was their explanation for issuing legal visas into the US mainland for more than a dozen known and suspected al Qaeda operatives??

[SDuderstadt]

40. I've got a better idea....

since the 9/11 CR has NUMEROUS references to the issue, why don't you actually read the report. You haven't, have you....

[rollingrock]

41. Why can't you ever give a straight answer to a simple question!??

its because

a) you don't know the answer because you never read the report

or

b) the report has no credible answer to the simple question


or most likely, all of the above

[KDLarsen]

43. Here

(starting) Page 168 will tell you how they went about forging, recycling and cleaning passports to avoid suspicion.

(starting) Page 384 will tell you what was done wrong. That is, little to no effort was being made to determine if people really were who they claimed to be.

[rollingrock]

44. Doesn't hold water

1) the two hijackers in San Diego were being tracked by the FBI and were known to be terrorists.
yet the FBI did nothing to apprehend them once they entered the country. Other hijackers were identified as terrorists and tracked by Able Danger, including the alleged ringleader Mohammed Atta, and yet why was Atta never stopped or apprehended even after he entered the country and identified??

2) the 20th hijacker Naez Khan had a change of heart, went to the FBI in April 2000 and confessed the entire 9/11 plot. Khan was given two lie detector tests and passed both and yet the FBI still did nothing. They ordered him released, as reported by Brian Williams of ABC et al.

3) Several hijackers obtained legitimate passports, not forged or phony, through the Saudi Visa Express program and/or the INS.

Bush Calls for Probe of INS After Hijackers' Visas OKd
http://articles.latimes.com/2002/mar/14/news/mn-32815

Express Visa Program
http://articles.latimes.com/2001/dec/17/news/mn-15615

--------------------------------

The 9/11 cover-up commission fails to mention any of that.

If any of the passports were forged, they could have been forged by the CIA and probably were given the CIA's history of doing so.

[KDLarsen]

45. Sigh...

1) No they weren't. It was the CIA who knew about them, and knew they were coming to the US, but for whatever reason decided not to tell the FBI about it. As for Able Danger, I'm sorry, but it just doesn't hold up: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Able_Danger

2) His name doesn't turn up anything, could you give me a timestamp in Zero where it's at? And anyway, it's still mighty impressive that he was able to finger 30 hijackers in the US, when we know that only two were in the US at that time.

3) And were able to get visas since they had no criminal (terrorist) record and had a solid background, so the programs used to go through the applications didn't mark them out. The 9/11 Commission report mentions that a potential hijacker had been turned away by an immigration officer, who had used his own personal judgement and concluded that the persons story didn't hold up.

As for your links, the top one is a pretty good idea of the problem with the INS system. The fact that they issued a visa to one of the hijackers six months after the attacks, only shows how little care is taken when checking peoples ID. And this was AFTER 9/11, where you'd imagine that the checks would have become quite strict.

[rollingrock]

46. Khan knew the other 30 hijackers

because he said he trained with them on basic hijacking techniques before entering the US.


ABC piece on Naez Khan at 9:20
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DpWa3gjj3M&feature=PlayList&p=3247BDD9C03C171C&index=3

NBC report on Naez Khan:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KJc_QPk4zA&feature=PlayList&p=3247BDD9C03C171C&index=4

The FBI agents in Newark believed him, but the word came from headquarters to
'return him to London and forget about it' - Lisa Myers NBC news

[KDLarsen]

47. The problem with Niaz Khan

I'll agree it's true he had been recruited by Al-Qaeda to participate in an airplane plot. Unfortunately, the plot he had been recruited for involved flying a plane to Afghanistan or blowing it up. The story, along with the FBI's explanation which I find reasonable, is at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5131524/

ETA: Looks like he changed his story somewhere along the line. In the MSNBC piece he claimed they were going to fly to Afghanistan or blow up the plane, but other news stories claim that they were going to fly the plane into a building. Sounds fishy.

YAETA: Just re-read the article, Niaz Khan didn't even know what the plan was.

[SDuderstadt]

48. As I've stated before....

I've thought this is just more of RR's typical bullshit.

Read his summarization, then read the actual source (if you can actually find it, no thanks to him) and you will consistently find there are huge gaps in RR's characterization.

[rollingrock]

50. OMG what a load of CRAP

why the hell would he be in the US if he was supposed to carry out the attack in Afghanistan??
He knew the other 30 hijackers because they had trained together in hijacking techniques before entering the US.

He was in the US in order to carry out an attack on AMERICAN SOIL. Duh!

[SDuderstadt]

52. Dude...

aren't you a "no-planer"?

[rollingrock]

56. Dude...

aren't you a "pancaker"?

or is it IHOPer?

:rofl:

[SDuderstadt]

58. Aren't you a "no-planer"?

Simple question.

[rollingrock]

60. You want to talk about some BULL CRAP??

start your own thread.

stick to the subject or GTFO.

[SDuderstadt]

62. My question is entirely relevant....

if you are, as I recall, a "no-planer", wouldn't posting about a hijacker essentially undermine your position?

[KDLarsen]

53. Remind me..

What domestic Afghan routes were flown by US airlines in 2000? :eyes:

[rollingrock]

54. In addition

Khan had underwent TWO separate FBI polygraph tests and passed both with flying colors, was interrogated by the FBI in the Newark field office for three straight weeks and all the agents there believed him, so there is no question about his credibility!

[KDLarsen]

55. Read the MSNBC article

All they had, was the fact that he had been trained to hijack a plane, and that he would meet someone in the US who would tell him what the actual plan was. That was it. He never knew what the plan was. What should the FBI have done? Waterboarded him?

They sent him back to Britain and told the Scotland Yard to follow up on his story, which they apparently neglected to do.

[rollingrock]

59. Dear God almighty, what a load

of course, that's what FBI headquarters is going to feed you, they are going to feed you a line of crap because they were the same ones who ordered khan released for no good reason. Pure idiocy. Why the hell would they send him to Scotland Yard if he is telling them the attack is to be carried out on US soil.

The Newark agents should have followed up on Khan's leads but they never did because they were told by FBI Headquarters to let him go and FORGET ABOUT IT.

[KDLarsen]

64. So, tell me, what leads should they have followed up on?

Niaz Khan had nothing substantial, other than he was supposed to meet a guy, decided agaisnt it and instead blew all his money on gambling. He was kept for 3 weeks and at some point someone had to make a decision. They couldn't keep him there any longer, since he had no new information.

Why send him to Scotland Yard? Because, dunno, he was a British citizen?! Keep in mind he was recruited at his local mosque in the UK, perhaps the Scotland Yard would like to know more about that.

[SDuderstadt]

57. "had underwent"?

You mean either just plain "underwent" or "had undergone", dude.

[rollingrock]

49. The Saudi Visa Express program

...was implemented in JUNE 2001 by Bush's State Department, just three months before 9/11.
Does anyone in their right mind think that was a mere coincidence??

The Visa Express program, put in place just four months before the attacks, allowed the three hijackers to arrange their visas through a State Department-designated travel agency, the official says. Fifteen of the 19 hijackers obtained their U.S. travel visas in Saudi Arabia.

None of the three men, the American government official says, was ever questioned by U.S. consular officers in Saudi Arabia. Each took his travel papers and passport to a commercial travel agency, which submitted the applications to the State Department.

Visa Express "is a bad idea," says Jessica Vaughan, a former consular officer. "The issuing officer has no idea whether the person applying for the visa is actually the person (listed) in the documents and application."

-US News & World Report
www.usnews.com/usnews/news/terror/articles/visa011212.htm

Why the hell did this program exist?? Except for the purpose of legally and intentionally importing Saudi terrorists into the United States that otherwise would have been denied?? No such Visa Express program existed for any other country, not even for our western European allies! Does that make any sense?? But the Bush State Dept did make the program for Saudi Arabia, and ONLY Saudi Arabia, the same country that OSAMA BIN LADEN himself was born. The country that is the biggest breeding ground in the world for international terrorism has a VISA EXPRESS PROGRAM!?


--------------------

When asked what the reasoning was for this incredibly breach of security, consular officials gave an equally incredibly absurd answer:

The U.S. Embassy in Saudi Arabia made no secret that it prized convenience for travelers who sought visas to visit America.

"Applicants will no longer have to take time off from work, no longer have to wait in long lines under the hot sun and in crowded waiting rooms, and no longer be limited by any time constraints," U.S. consular officials in the kingdom announced in June, introducing an "express" visa program under which Saudis and others could send their requests to certain travel agencies, which became go-betweens with the U.S. Embassy."

http://articles.latimes.com/2001/dec/17/news/mn-15615


Oh. My. God.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl::rofl:

[KDLarsen]

51. 9/11 Commission Report - page 256/257

On June 22, the CIA notified all its station chiefs about intelligence suggesting a possible al Qaeda suicide attack on a U.S. target over the next few days.DCI Tenet asked that all U.S. ambassadors be briefed.(12) That same day, the State Department notified all embassies of the terrorist threat and updated its worldwide public warning. In June, the State Department initiated the Visa Express program in Saudi Arabia as a security measure, in order to keep long lines of foreigners away from vulnerable embassy spaces. The program permitted visa applications to be made through travel agencies, instead of directly at the embassy or consulate.

At the time it seemed a good idea, but in hindsight it was everything but.

[rollingrock]

61. Thanks for proving

the cover-up commission is a source of never-ending bull crap.

:rofl:

[SDuderstadt]

63. Simple question (once more), RR...

Have you actually read the 9/11 Commission Report?

[rollingrock]

65. I did indeed, ahve you?

and so did Senator Max Cleland, who thinks it was a pile of cow dung as well.

I ended up flushing it down the toilet.

[SDuderstadt]

66. Tell me something....

if you actually read it, why aren't you more familiar with it?

And, I'd love for you to find a link to Cleland's criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report. Can you? While it's true that Cleland was initially appointed to the Commission but subsequently resigned, citing stonewalling by the Bush administration, I can't find anything remotely like what you claim he said/felt about the CR itself.


In fact, the NYT article attributes Cleland resignation from the Commission as more due to his nomination to the board of the Ex-IM Bank.

Mr. Cleland's intention to resign from the 10-member commission has been known since last summer, when Senate Democrats announced that they had recommended him for a Democratic slot on the board of the Export-Import Bank. But the timing of his departure became clear only last week, when the White House formally sent the nomination to the Senate.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/05/us/ex-senator-will-soon-quit-9-11-panel-leaving-gap-for-victims-advocates.html

[rollingrock]

67. Let's see what Cleland says

“The White House has played cover-up.”

Cleland attacked his own commission after the other members cut a deal to accept highly limited access to CIA reports to the White House that may indicate advance knowledge of the attacks on the part of the Bush administration...

"....This is a scam," Cleland said. "It's disgusting. America is being cheated."

"As each day goes by," Cleland said, "we learn that this government knew a whole lot more about these terrorists before September 11 than it has ever admitted (NY Times 10/26/03)

".... Let's chase this rabbit into the ground. They had a plan to go to war and when 9/11 happened that's what they did; they went to war." He called this “a national scandal.”(Salon, November 2003)

----------------


He basically says, the report is a pile of cow manure.

[SDuderstadt]

69. Dude....since the Report wasn't completed until far later...

he couldn't have been talking about the Report. You're taking his remarks out of the context in which they were made. Your dishonesty in this matter is absolutely stunning.

[rollingrock]

72. Cleland called the commission's deal with the WH

a scam and a disgusting fraud. Cleland was also livid about the deal to allow Cheney and Bush to testify together, not under oath and off the record.

...what part of the word 'scam' do you not understand?

Do you require Spanish subtitles?

[SDuderstadt]

73. Dude...

Cleland is clear about what he is specifically talking about and it isn't the 9/11 Commission Report. You've been busted once again. Your dishonesty in this matter is noted...again.

[rollingrock]

74. The commission is a scam

do you think he believes a report written by a scam commission can be a credible one?

Maybe it could happen in pancaker world.

[SDuderstadt]

76. Dude...

you were trying to misreprent comments he made about the commission and some of the arrangements that were made, as comments he was making about the 9/11 Commission Report, when the report had not even been written or released. That's dishonest in my book.

[rollingrock]

75. In pancaker fantasy world

a report written by a Bush crony is perfectly credible one, that can never be questioned.

[SDuderstadt]

77. No one is saying it can't be questioned, dude...

the issue is your misrepresentation of what Cleland was referring to. It obviously was not the report.

[rollingrock]

81. That's your opinion /nt

[SDuderstadt]

83. Jesus Fucking Christ, dude....

it is not my OPINION since the report had not even been written yet. It's utterly dishonest to claim that Cleland is referring to something that didn't even exist when he made those comments. This is why no one here takes you seriously, dude.

[rschop]

68. re: but for whatever reason, (the CIA), decided not to tell the FBI about it

From prior post:

1) No they weren't. It was the CIA who knew about them, and knew they were coming to the US, but for whatever reason decided not to tell the FBI about it.

The NSA and CIA both gave the information on Mihdhar and Hazmi and the fact they were going to an important al Qaeda planning meeting in Kuala Lumpur in early January 2000, to FBI Director Louis Freeh in December 1999, and January 2000 respectively, and this information ended up in FBI Director Louis Freeh’s daily briefing papers on January 4, 2000. Since I think you can say that the Director of the FBI is part of the FBI you can say that they did tell the FBI. But we also know that CIA deputy chief of the CIA Bin Laden unit, Tom Wilshire, blocked FBI Agent Doug Miller's CIR on Khalid al-Mihdhar from being sent to the FBI on January 5, 2000, and this has never been explained.

When FBI Agent Ali Soufan and head FBI investigators on the Cole bombing asked FBI Director Louis Freeh in November 2000 if he would make a official request to the CIA and CIA Director George Tenet for any information that the CIA had on any al Qaeda planning meeting in Kuala Lumpur or on Khallad Bin Attash, who the FBI criminal investigators thought was the mastermind of the Cole bombing, he was told that the CIA had no such information when in fact Freeh himself had be given this very information by the CIA.

This is prima fascia evidence that the Director of the FBI Louis Freeh had not only criminally obstructed the FBI criminal investigation of the Cole bombing, but had withheld information from his own FBI investigators that could have stopped the attacks on 9/11 and could have prevented the deaths of 3000 people who perished in theses attack. See page 181 of the 9/11 Commission report and pages 238-239 of the DOJ IG report on "the Performance of the FBI prior to 9/11" for the backup details.

This information is also found at www.eventson911.com, along with even more horrific information that proves that the CIA working with FBI HQ agents used criminal and nefarious means to shut down the FBI investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi by the Cole bombing investigators who wanted to search for and find Mihdhar and Hazmi before they could carry out a horrific terrorist attack in the US. Since the CIA and FBI HQ knew about the horrific attacks about to take place inside of the US and even knew that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US in order to take part in these horrific attacks, it is impossible to believe that when they shut down FBI Agent Steve Bongardt’s investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi, that they did not know as a direct result of their actions that thousands of Americans were going to be murdered in these attacks.

[rollingrock]

78. Hazmi, Midhar, Khan, Atta, the list goes on

All were under constant surveillance by the FBI and other intelligence agencies
the minute they stepped foot on US soil and in most cases even before.

And yet, no arrests, no action was ever taken on them.

[KDLarsen]

79. Got evidence of that?

No? Thought so.

[rollingrock]

80. What a load

Hazmi and Midhar were staying with an FBI informant in San Diego, for example.

See Graham's book and articles on the matter.

Don't talk about things of which you know nothing about.

[KDLarsen]

82. What FBI informant?

They stayed on their own at the Parkwood Apartments in San Diego.

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KDLarsen]

86. I'd prefer if you didn't insinuate I might be hearing voices

The answer to your question: The FBI Hijacker Timeline page 54

http://www.nefafoundation.org/miscellaneous/FeaturedDocs/FBI911Timeline.pdf

[rollingrock]

88. WTF is NEFA?

sorry, you're going to need something a bit more credible than that.

[SDuderstadt]

91. Dude...you're the one who made the initial claim...

please provide proof that Atta was under constant surveillance by the FBI. I'm betting you can't.

[KDLarsen]

92. They're hosting it?

But since you asked so kindly: http://www1.nefafoundation.org/aboutus.html

The NEFA Foundation is a 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt, charitable organization created after the attacks of September 11, 2001. The Foundation strives to help prevent future tragedies in the U.S. and abroad by exposing those responsible for planning, funding, and executing terrorist activities, with a particular emphasis on Islamic militant organizations.

But what has that got to with the timeline?

[rollingrock]

90. The New England Foundation for the Arts!?

WTF? lol

[KDLarsen]

93. A shining example of the investigative skills of 9/11 Truthers

You couldn't even bother to go to www.nefafoundation.org and see for yourself :eyes:

[SDuderstadt]

94. I've got a better shining example of...

RR's ineptitude.

See posts 87 and 89. He had the audacity to ask me if I was illiterate, when he can't even decipher the difference between "or" and "and".

[SDuderstadt]

85. You claim Atta was...

under constant FBI surveillance from the moment he came to the US. Can you prove that, dude?

[rollingrock]

87. Are you illiterate?

what part of other do you not understand?

[SDuderstadt]

89. No, I'm not illiterate....

are you?

Here's your EXACT claim, dude:

All were under constant surveillance by the FBI and other intelligence agencies

Do you understand what AND means? In order for your claim to be true, Atta would have had to be, at a minimum, under surveillance by the FBI. You didn't say "the FBI OR other intelligence agencies", dude.

It's amazing how you blame others for YOUR imprecision.

[rschop]

95. Just so there is no mistake, the FBI sabotaged their own investigation

When FBI Agent Ali Soufan and head FBI investigator on the Cole bombing asked FBI Director Louis Freeh in November 2000 if he would make a official request to the CIA and CIA Director George Tenet for any information that the CIA had on any al Qaeda planning meeting in Kuala Lumpur or on Khallad Bin Attash, who the FBI criminal investigators thought was the mastermind of the Cole bombing, he was told that the CIA had no such information when in fact Freeh himself had be given this very information by the CIA.

This is prima fascia evidence that the Director of the FBI Louis Freeh had not only criminally obstructed the FBI criminal investigation of the Cole bombing, but had withheld information from his own FBI investigators that could have stopped the attacks on 9/11 and could have prevented the deaths of 3000 people who perished in theses attack. See page 181 of the 9/11 Commission report and pages 238-239 of the DOJ IG report on "the Performance of the FBI prior to 9/11" for the backup details. See prior post #68.

[tenseconds]

70. warning: beware

Beware of the man with all the answers.

[KDLarsen]

71. I'm terribly sorry for offering an opposing view

:eyes: